HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6044 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Rejoinder affidavit has been filed today, is taken on record. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the bail rejection order dated 21.06.2025 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Lalitpur in Bail Application No.935 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No.171 of 2025, under Sections 74, 352, 351(3) of BNSS and Section 3(1) da & dha, 3(2)5, 3(2) 5a of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station Talbehat, District Lalitpur. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned AGA for the State- respondent no.1, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and perused the entire record. 4. According to the prosecution case, on 26.04.2025 at about 11.30 in the night when the mother of the informant aged about 90 years was sleeping in her Tapra, the accused appellant forcibly committed rape upon her. It is also alleged that the accused persons while using caste related abusive language have also threaten to kill her. 5. Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The appellant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. Further submission is that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. As per statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS, there are material contradictions in her statement. The victim is aged about 73 years. As per medical report, no internal or external injury found on the body of the victim. Further submission is that till date, charge has not been framed and no witnesses have been recorded. Since the trial has not been started as yet, Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Akshay Raj Singh, Vijit Saxena Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Satya Narayan Gupta Sri Ram Yadav .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. And Another/2012 .....Respondent(s) there is no possibility of early conclusion of trial, hence, the appellant may be enlarged on bail. Appellant is languishing in jail since 28.04.2025 having previous criminal history of one case in which the appellant is on bail. Further submission is that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the respondent no.2 vehemently opposed the the prayer for bail of the appellant and has submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to S.C./S.T. Community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully. 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, role assigned to the present appellant and the nature of injury, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set-aside. 10. Let the appellant-Sri Ram Yadav, involved in aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. CRLA No. 6044 of 2025 2 (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. September 22, 2025 Ajeet CRLA No. 6044 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- AJEET KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad